In the latest shooting, police say telephone equipment was hit, and that phone service to parts of Kimmirut were knocked out. Crews from NorthwesTel were working to restore the service on Saturday afternoon.

Police report there was considerable damage to their truck and to the detachment. Charges are pending, they said.

Smee expressed thanks to the people who stepped forward to stop the man while the two RCMP members and the woman were inside the detachment.

“This was a highly volatile situation. To put their lives at risk for us, there just aren’t enough words to express our sincerest gratitude,” Smee said in the release.

“All put their lives at risk to assist our police officers.”

Police say one of the members has 36 years of service and the other about 15 years.

This was a highly volatile situation. To put their lives at risk for us, there just aren’t enough words to express our sincerest gratitude

Two new members were flown in from Iqaluit to relieve both Kimmirut members, Smee said, to ensure “their well-being is addressed as well as ongoing protection of the community.”

RCMP said in their news release that they understand that there are high risks in protecting the lives and the communities where they serve, but they said“ no one person, child, or community should be subjected to this type of violence.”

On March 18th, two RCMP members posted in Kimmirut were shot at and targeted at their respective homes while they and their families were sleeping.

Four bullets entered one members’ residence while five entered the other.

An RCMP emergency response team was dispatched from Iqaluit and a man was arrested following a tip from a community member.

Police say they seized a loaded .22 calibre rifle and say alcohol was a factor.

RCMP said Saturday that both recent incidents draw attention to the issue of increased measures to regulate alcohol distribution and consumption in Nunavut. Kimmirut had previously been dry, but the alcohol ban was overturned in a plebiscite in February, with conditions established on who can buy alcohol and bring it into the community.

Police say it also highlights the need to ensure the safe handling and storage of firearms.

An RCMP “restorative justice co-ordinator and crisis negotiator” appeared in a Saskatoon court, charged with assaulting his 14-year-old daughter over items she had posted on her Facebook page.

Sgt. Michael D. Luciak’s job is to deal with crisis situations and defuse tense situations. But he says he “lost it” when he discovered his daughter had defied his order forbidding her from using Facebook.

When he saw what she had written — which included information about her personal life and crude posts about his fiancee — Luciak experienced a “flash of anger,” defence lawyer Leslie Sullivan said Tuesday in Saskatoon provincial court.

Luciak kicked his daughter in the shin and struck her on the back of the head and on her upper arm.

Luciak’s lawyer told the court he quickly realized his mistake and took his daughter to her mother’s home. “At no time did he feel what he did was right.”

Luciak pleaded guilty to the charge. Sullivan said she discussed the irony of the situation with him: Luciak is the restorative justice co-ordinator for Saskatchewan and its primary crisis negotiator. He plans to quit the force, though, and go into private enterprise. Since he received an absolute discharge, he won’t have a record to worry about.

So he won’t have to be transferred to B.C. with other RCMP problem cases. Lucky for B.C., I guess.

Canadians already know there are serious problems within the RCMP and its ranks. Let’s be charitable and call them “human resource” issues: Mounties who behave abominably, Mounties who commit crimes yet remain employed and wearing the red serge.

The body of evidence keeps growing, and it can’t be ignored. The problems seem especially acute in British Columbia, home of “E” Division, the RCMP’s largest operation in Canada. On Tuesday, we learned of another case. RCMP Cpl. Tony Spink, a Special Investigations Unit member in Victoria, has been charged with two counts of fraud under $5,000 “relating to improper use of Government of Canada credit cards while off-duty,” according to an “E” Division press release. “Cpl. Spink is currently suspended with pay. However, he was served on Friday June 22 with a Notice of Intent to Recommend Stoppage of Pay and Allowances. There is also an internal RCMP Code of Conduct investigation underway.”

The allegations are troubling; accusations of fraud always are. While there’s a perception that misconduct in the ranks is becoming routine, the RCMP should at least be commended for being more open about it these days.

Unfortunately, and separate from the latest case, there’s a growing feeling that B.C. has become a dumping ground for the bad: Mounties whom the brass should be able to discharge, but cannot. The rules don’t allow for simple, straightforward termination, even in cases that involve shocking behaviour and RCMP-committed crime.

Donald Ray is the most notorious example of late. As an RCMP polygraph operator in Alberta, he engaged in a pattern of sexual misconduct at work. He exposed his penis to a female colleague and asked her to touch it. He had sex with a woman in a polygraph suite during lunch breaks. He had sex with a woman in a parking lot. He drank while at work.

Staff Sgt. Ray was hauled on the carpet. He went before an RCMP disciplinary panel last year, and a decision was rendered in January. He was docked 10 days pay and demoted to sergeant. And then he was transferred to B.C.

B.C. Premier Christy Clark denounced the move. Even RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson was upset. “It’s a sad stain on our reputation and I understand the Province of British Columbia’s concerns about his transfer,” he wrote, in an internal email that surfaced in May.

On Monday, another appalling case was exposed by Vancouver Province reporter Sam Cooper. “Drunk-driving Mountie shifted to B.C.,” read his story’s headline. An RCMP Inspector was convicted in Saskatchewan court of driving under the influence, in February. He then went into an RCMP Code of Conduct disciplinary hearing. He wasn’t dismissed, and he wasn’t demoted, reported the Province. He was transferred, from Saskatchewan to Vancouver. There were mitigating circumstances.

“In RCMP discipline hearings it was found his inappropriate conduct was due to alcoholism,” Deputy Commissioner Craig Callens told the newspaper. The Mountie says he has quit drinking.

The same member was in a scrape three years ago, when he assaulted a fellow officer inside a Regina residence. The “off-duty incident” led to an arrest and assault charge, which was eventually withdrawn after the accused admitted to the offence and went through a mediation process.

Should every policeman who gets into a tussle or battles alcoholism be terminated? No. Should any officer who admits to sexual misconduct, or who is convicted of a crime, be fired immediately? Of course. But they rarely are.

The Conservative government recognizes that rooting out bad Mounties is difficult, if not impossible, thanks to arcane RCMP rules. Serious cases of misconduct that require more than a reprimand can take up to five years to resolve. Unfortunately, the government’s response — the proposed Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability Act may not go far enough.

“The [RCMP] Commissioner currently lacks the authority to effectively manage many of the basic, but vital components of the RCMP workforce,” reads an introduction to the proposed Act. It was unveiled last week, just as the House of Commons prepared to rise for the summer break.

“The proposed legislation will provide the Commissioner: the direct authority to discharge members for various non-disciplinary administrative reasons (e.g., including performance and absenteeism from the workplace).”

So, the Commissioner could someday be able to fire Mounties who don’t show up for work? Pretty weak sauce for the boss.

Members who commit serious transgressions — “cases where dismissal could be an outcome” — would still be referred to an RCMP conduct board, should the proposed legislation pass one day. “However, those boards would be significantly different from the current adjudication boards in that they would have the discretion necessary to consider and resolve cases in the most informal and expeditious manner as possible, given the circumstances … The formality and administrative burdens will be significantly reduced in favour of a fair, streamlined and proportionate system.”

In other words, criminals in the ranks might remain there. Dismissal “could be an outcome.” No guarantees. The RCMP and the men and women who serve with integrity deserve better. So do the rest of us.

National Post
bhutchinson@nationalpost.com

]]>http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/brian-hutchinson-welcome-to-b-c-dumping-ground-for-bad-mounties/feed/0std864C0039.jpgMarni Soupcoff on RCMP enduring the same healthcare as the rest of ushttp://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/marni-soupcoff-on-rcmp-enduring-the-same-healthcare-as-the-rest-of-us
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/marni-soupcoff-on-rcmp-enduring-the-same-healthcare-as-the-rest-of-us#commentsTue, 22 May 2012 20:03:07 +0000http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/?p=79039

The Harper government’s omnibus budget bill is threatening to deny members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police access to modern medicine, leaving them to suffer alone, untreated when injured or ill. Or so you’d think from the fuss being made about proposed changes to RCMP health care. Here’s what Staff-Sergeant Abe Townsend, national executive for the Mounties’ Staff Relations Representative Program, told the Globe and Mail in an interview: “We travel in harm’s way to serve the public interest…. The quid pro quo is that if circumstances are unfortunate and we become sick or injured, we will not be left to whither [sic] on our own and the Canadian public has our back. It’s a fair exchange of trust.”

The thing is, no Mountie is going to wither by virtue of the Tories’ plan — at least no more so than any other Canadian. The idea is simply that members of the RCMP would rejoin the normal health care system in their provinces of residence, rather than being enrolled in a unique federal health-care system of their own, as they are now. Millions of dollars would be saved by getting rid of the current bureaucratic process in which Mounties essentially receive the same care as everyone else (they show up at the same hospitals and see the same doctors), but are billed as non-residents covered by federal contract, creating enormous administrative costs.

Deeming the change a “dereliction of duty” by the feds, as Jeff Rose-Martland, the president of an advocacy group called Our Duty, did on the CBC, is ridiculous. “The federal government wants to use the mounted police but not take care of them,” he said. But how is giving Mounties the same universal health coverage as every single other Canadian enjoys a failure to take care of them? Is the rule that citizens who do more for the country should be entitled to better health care than everyone else? Should Mounties and, say, Canadian Forces members be bumped up to the top of the queue any time they need a surgical procedure? What about a kidney or a lung?

If the current provincial healthcare systems aren’t good enough for federal police (which is a strange case to make anyway given that the Mounties have essentially been seeing the same providers, just under a more convoluted billing structure that doubles or triples the cost), then they’re not good enough for the rest of us either.

While no one likes change, the RCMP would be wise to quit whining about proposed cost-saving measures that would do little but demand Mounties endure the regular, everyday hassles of life. It’s not hard to see why they don’t want to start having to bank sick days (they currently operate under an uncapped sick leave system). However, ordinary Canadians are making far greater sacrifices on the altar of cost savings every day — and most of them are involved in far fewer scandals and screw-ups than the RCMP has been of late.

Want to talk about a fair exchange of trust? In short — we’ll pay the Mounties well, provide them generous benefits and entrust them with our liberty. And in exchange, they will protect us and try to refrain from: sex and drinking escapades; turning incorrect intelligence over to foreign authorities that will result in our torture; sexual harassment; misuse of internal pension money; excessive Tasering and other disgraceful conduct.

Wouldn’t that be a reasonable trade? Even without unlimited sick leave and a health-care system for the Mounties to call their own?

It has been four years since the federal government announced a strategy to reform the RCMP, but the news Canadians are hearing out of headquarters is that the heavy lifting hasn’t even begun. Don’t blame the RCMP for that. Blame its political masters.

The fact that the Prime Minister and his buddies swagger like frontier sheriffs, jawing about the need for law and order, makes it all the more strange that they are starving Canada’s national police service of the infrastructure and resources needed to enforce the law.

Let’s start with money. Every report published over the last decade on the need for RCMP reform has been blunt about the fact that the RCMP is understaffed, that too many officers are burning out and that the Canadian public is never going to get the policing it deserves without a significant funding increase.

The latest report, released last month, was co-authored by Linda Duxbury, a Carleton University business professor who has been studying the RCMP for years. It concludes that personnel shortages and onerous off-duty responsibilities, in conjunction with an intolerant corporate structure, are destroying the family lives of police officers across the country.

That shouldn’t be news. The Senate committee on national security and defence concluded a couple of years ago that the RCMP needs another 5,000 personnel to perform the roles that politicians keep piling on. David McAusland, who was chair of the RCMP Reform Implementation Council, pointed out repeatedly in his reports that the RCMP reform process wasn’t going anywhere unless the government came up with a bundle of cash.

Instead, the government is subtracting rather than adding. The RCMP is going to undergo the same kind of cutbacks that other government departments are currently being subjected to.

How a law-and-order government determined that cutting back on its national police service — while expanding that service’s responsibilities — fit within its ideological drive to shrink government is beyond me. Ditto for shrinking police capacity while spending $8-billion to expand prisons.

Even before the cutbacks come into play, RCMP attrition appears to be outstripping recruitment. The RCMP expects to recruit 736 members a year for the next three years. Unfortunately, one estimate has it that the service will lose close to 1,000 members a year over the same period.

Obviously, the resources just aren’t available to deal with the kind of stress that Duxbury and her colleagues have documented. In 2010, the RCMP decided to go ahead with a pilot project modelled after a Canadian Forces program — Operational Stress Injury Social Support (OSISS). That program helps rehabilitate soldiers suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Dr. Greg Passey of the British Columbia Stress Injury Clinic has been quoted as saying that more police officers suffer from PTSD than do soldiers.

Guess what? The RCMP has announced that it has cancelled its plans for the pilot project, arguing that it “has in place policies and programs that promote a healthy and safe work environment.” Really? That’s certainly not the kind of environment we’ve been hearing about in the headlines. No money available — that’s my guess.

Money isn’t the only problem. Report after report has called for structural reform that would remove the RCMP from the bureaucratic maze in Ottawa while at the same time subjecting it to independent civilian review to assure the public that officers are under control.

Last month, both RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson and his British Columbia deputy, Craig Callens, publicly begged for the power to fire rogue officers with cause, or to at least suspend them without pay. But because the RCMP is treated as just one more department in the federal bureaucracy, officers with blatant misconduct records get paid to hang around forever.

Bureaucrats who know nothing about policing pull the strings on how the nation’s police service deploys its resources and manages and disciplines its employees. Expert after expert has recommended that the RCMP become a separate employer from the government, to no avail.

Neither internal nor external complaints against rogue officers tend to get them fired, because the Commission of Public Complaints Against the RCMP is toothless. Instead of strengthening this commission or setting up a new independent civilian review body, the government fired the CPC’s last commissioner for telling the truth about his office’s impotence. As Helene Desabrais (a former RCMP officer who quit after repeated harassment), remarked last month, “As long as the RCMP is investigating itself, nothing will ever change.”

The class action suits that are starting to mushroom paint a picture of a police service that is riddled with unfairness, particularly toward women and minorities.

Expand the prisons. Shrink the police. Fail to act on needed reforms. There’s a formula for justice that’s bound to baffle the civilized world.

National Post

Colin Kenny is former chair of the Senate committee on national security and defence.

A police dog helped B.C. Mounties find three men hiding in the walls of a large marijuana grow-op producing an estimated $2.5-million in illegal drugs, the RCMP said Friday.

Williams Lake RCMP and Baron the police dog, from the Prince George Police Dog Services, executed a search warrant at a home in Quesnel, B.C., south of Prince George, earlier this week. Once inside the house, which had no furniture, police realized it was being used solely as a grow-op. An initial search of the building failed to turn up any suspects.

However, when Baron did a perimeter search of the property, he found no track leading away from the house. Confident that the suspects were still inside the building, officers returned to find the men hiding in a secret compartment between two walls.

“RCMP seized 2,591 plants in various stages of growth along with related growing equipment,”said Constable Lesley Smith, spokeswoman for the North District RCMP. She said police also seized a pickup truck that was being used to transport materials for the grow-op.

Three men aged 34, 35 and 37, who reside in B.C.’s Lower Mainland, are facing charges of production of a controlled substance and possession for the purpose of trafficking. RCMP did not identify the individuals.

They were released from custody and will appear in court at a later date.

B.C. RCMPThree men were hiding in this secret compartment between two walls of a Quesnel, B.C. grow-op.

Although I don’t have any proof, I’m fairly convinced the RCMP has developed a top-secret impermeable force field that surrounds national headquarters and all top-level executive offices, making them immune from learning. Past mistakes hurl themselves against the invisible shield and bounce away before their lessons can be absorbed. Changes in culture, in attitude, in national opinion are deflected harmlessly into the atmosphere before they can have any impact on the brains within.

Thus you get the Dziekanski tragedy, in which the force did all it could to avoid accepting responsibility for what the world could see was the tragically botched treatment of an innocent traveller unfortunate enough to cross their path at Vancouver airport. You have the soul-destroying ineptitude of the Pickton investigation, now being peeled away like the rings on an onion at a B.C. inquiry, which has succeeded in exposing new levels of rot despite the apparent efforts of a friendly commissioner to continue providing protective cover.

And we have the case of Susan Gastaldo, an RCMP officer who could lose her job for having sex with a superior officer in an RCMP cruiser. Gastaldo and Staff-Sgt. Travis Pearson, her boss at the time, were found guilty of disgraceful conduct by a three-person board of a adjudicators. Pearson pleaded guilty and apologized for disgracing his family and the force, and was fined 10 days loss of pay. Gastaldo refused to admit guilt, arguing that she was forced into the relationship.

The board rejected her case, ruling that 120 phone calls and 160 emails between the two were romantic and sexual in nature and proved “the romantic intensity never waned” right up to the moment they were found out. Instead they accepted the theory of Pearson’s lawyer, that Gastaldo was a willing partner to the affair but claimed she was forced into it when confronted by her husband, and had to stick to that story to save her marriage.

So rather than the slap on the hand administered to Pearson, she faces the far more severe punishment of being kicked off the force. “One guy loses $4,000 and the other person loses their job,” pointed out her lawyer Larry McGonigal. Given the cost in loss of promotions, benefits and future earnings, “we’re talking about the difference of $4,000 and she could lose $4 million.”

The RCMP, as is well known, is going through a harrowing time. Not the least of its worries is its deeply ingrained lack of respect for women, as evidenced by a string of harassment cases involving female officers who complained of threats, bullying, belittlement and sexual license, all of which was ignored until brought to light by Cpl. Catherine Galliford, who said she was driven off the force by post-traumatic stress disorder after years of sexual harassment.

So now an RCMP conduct board has to decide whether to impose a far harsher sentence on a woman defendant than it did on the man involved, and the key is her refusal to admit guilt. Whatever the excuse Galliford put forward, the act was the same. And those women still on the force will be watching very closely for signs that the impermeable protective shield is still firmly in place.

EDMONTON — Two RCMP officers have non-life threatening injuries after being shot during a standoff at a rural home outside the community of Breton, Alta. early on Sunday morning. Three other people are also being treated in relation to the incident.

The exact nature of the officers’ injuries is not being disclosed by RCMP, but spokesman Sgt. Tim Taniguchi said the injuries of one officer are superficial. He said the other is “probably going to be in the hospital for some period,” but would not elaborate further.

The officers are both members of the RCMP’s highly specialized Emergency Response Team.

Related

RCMP were called at about 5:20 p.m. on Saturday for a report that a 35-year-old man had been shot outside a rural home west of the town of Breton. The 35-year-old was taken to hospital with non-life threatening injuries.

Neighbours were then evacuated from the area, and a perimeter was set up around the home.

According to information released by RCMP on Sunday, “an exchange of gunfire between police and unknown individual(s) from the residence” at about 3:30 a.m., resulted in the shooting of the two ERT members.

Both were taken to hospital in Edmonton by air ambulance.

A man and a woman from the home were arrested at about 10:45 a.m. Both were taken to hospital for non-life threatening injuries.

RCMP say the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team has been called to examine the circumstances around the shooting.

VANCOUVER — The Mounties are not leaving British Columbia. Forget the veiled threats of abandonment, the suggestions that contract renewal negotiations between the province and the federal government will dissolve soon without agreement. There is political posturing, and there is reality. The fact is, the RCMP are too large and too powerful a presence in B.C. to just pack up and leave.

Unlike Ontario and Quebec, B.C. does not have its own force. Lots of people think it should. The Mounties are not hugely admired in these parts, thanks to recent high-profile debacles, deaths in custody, myriad more indiscretions including criminal behaviour; these have undermined their credibility and have infuriated the public. But B.C. is stuck with the red serge. Were the province interested in creating an alternative, it would have started the process years ago, long before its current contract for RCMP services was to expire. Which it is, next year.

Related

And yet B.C.’s interim attorney general, Shirley Bond, disclosed this week that Ottawa has handed her an ultimatum: Hurry up and renew the 20-year policing contract with Public Safety Canada, the federal department that oversees RCMP services, or lose them by an arbitrary date in 2014. Ms. Bond suggested she was given a November deadline to sign on the dotted line. Ottawa completed similar long-term agreements with Alberta and Saskatchewan back in August; it wants a deal with B.C. that’s based on “the same terms and conditions,” according to Public Safety minister Vic Toews.

Some 6,000 RCMP officers and civilian employees pull duty across this province. They represent 70% of all officers in B.C. (the RCMP make up 42% of police in Alberta, by comparison), and they are sole providers in cities as large as Surrey, which has a population approaching 500,000.

It is in Surrey, too, that a new RCMP division headquarters is being built, a cluster of “green” buildings with more than 84,000 square metres of office and laboratory space, and parking for almost 2,000 vehicles. The “fixed” cost of the project, to be shared by Ottawa and private companies, was pegged at $966-million when construction began in early 2010; the figure includes operations and maintenance expenses spread over 25 years. The headquarters is scheduled for completion next year. Such a large, purpose-built facility with long-term management agreements cannot be allowed to sit empty. And it won’t. Bet on the RCMP to be there, for decades.

But something has muddled negotiations between the province and Ottawa. Ms. Bond chose to complain in public, without offering details. Simon Fraser University criminologist and police expert Robert Gordon suspects the talks have bogged down over money. “There are two costing issues at work,” he said in a telephone interview Thursday. “One is the cost sharing formula. Who pays what.”

It works like this: With the exception of Ontario and Quebec, provincial and territorial governments negotiate long-term RCMP contracts on behalf of municipalities requiring RCMP services. The local governments pay most of the bills. Under the agreement that’s about to expire, communities with populations between 5,000 and 15,000 pay 70% of the annual RCMP tab. The federal government picks up the rest. Communities with more than 15,000 people pay 90% of the bills, with Ottawa handling the remainder. Provincial governments paid for certain RCMP services in full.

The new policing contracts signed with Alberta and Saskatchewan in August use the same basic cost sharing formulae. Prof. Gordon suspects that British Columbia and its municipalities want to pay less. “The larger communities in particular have a beef because their detachments tend to be under strength, so they don’t receive value for money.”

The second complicating issue, according to Prof. Gordon, is “cost containment.” Under the typical arrangement, communities sign their provincially-negotiated contracts for RCMP services, but they cannot put a hard limit on their spending. Individual RCMP detachments are “essentially autonomous entities,” noted Prof. Gordon, “and there’s no [mechanism for] local government to control what the police are doing.”

The Union of British Columbia Municipalities referred to the issue earlier this year. “The current contract negotiations with the Federal Government are not complete as there are some key decisions around the ‘cost base’ (e.g. cadet training, pay and compensation, and legal costs) that have yet to be made,” the UBCM said in a press release. “These are some of the key cost drivers underlying the agreement and the goal is to contain these costs…”

There’s another, more ominous “cost driver” that RCMP customers must also consider. The federal government introduced a bill in Parliament last year that would unionize rank and file Mounties. The RCMP is currently the only major police force in Canada that is not union organized; Bill C43, if made into law, would end that. “It would bring with it a raft of employment benefits, such as the payment of overtime. The cost of running the RCMP would skyrocket,” predicted Prof. Gordon.

Yet another argument for the creation of a B.C. squad to replace the Mounties? Perhaps. But the B.C. government has done little, if anything, to advance the idea; it seems more inclined to complain about current RCMP negotiations with Ottawa. No wonder Prof. Gordon figures the prospects of building a provincial police force are “fairly slim.” And that’s being optimistic.

WINNIPEG—Two Manitoba RCMP officers have been found guilty of beating a handcuffed man following a dispute outside a rural bar.

Corporal Jeffrey Thomas Moyse, 42, and Const. Trevor Kyle Ens, 31, had testified in their own defence earlier this year and denied the alleged October 2008 incident in Traverse Bay, about 120 kilometres northeast of Winnipeg.

But Queen’s Bench Justice Perry Schulman ruled Monday that both officers lacked credibility in rejecting their version of events and convicting them of assault. The judge said he favoured the evidence of Conley Papineau, 22, who told court he was punched in the face and stomach, kicked in the head and repeatedly thrown around by the accused after being confronted in a bar parking lot.

Papineau said Moyse and Ens then threw him in the back of their police car, stopped on the side of a remote highway and continued the attack. Papineau claims he was again punched and kicked and suffered a broken nose and several cuts and bruises. Papineau said he didn’t go to a hospital for any treatment because he didn’t want to spend “12 hours in a waiting room.”

Moyse and Ens admit they questioned Papineau in the parking lot of the Birchwood Motor Hotel because they believed he might have been attempting to drive while drunk. They described Papineau as appearing “grossly intoxicated” and staggering as he made his way over to a parked vehicle, where a friend of his was sitting inside. Papineau, who was not convicted of any crime, admitted he had about three drinks that night on an empty stomach as doesn’t believe he’d had anything to eat throughout the day.

Schulman said Monday the evidence doesn’t support the claims made by the officers. He said surveillance video of the parking lot showed Papineau displayed no signs of intoxication and appeared respectful of police who stopped him while he innocently was going to the vehicle simply to tell his friend they were going to stay a while.

Once they determined Papineau wasn’t driving anywhere, Ens and Moyse say they returned his identification and were prepared to let him return to the bar. Both claim he was “upset, agitated and confrontational” and shouted an obscenity at Moyse before “throwing his shoulder” into the officer. Moyse said he responded to the contact by grabbing hold of Papineau. Both men then fell to the ground.

Ens testified he handcuffed Papineau once Moyse restrained him. They put Papineau in the back seat and drove him to the Lac du Bonnet RCMP detachment, where he was detained for several hours until he sobered up. During the drive, the officers say Papineau continued to be aggressive, including smashing his own head on the glass barrier in their cruiser. He also claimed to be a member of a gang and made comments about causing harm to their family members, Moyse and Ens say.

The officers say any injuries Papineau suffered would be self-inflicted.

Moyse and Ens will be sentenced for their crime later this year. Their future job status has yet to be determined.

Rodney Shane Jackson was no saint, but he didn’t deserve to die from a bullet to the back, fired by an RCMP tactical team member. Last week, a coroner’s jury ruled Jackson’s 2009 death a homicide. The finding should force federal and provincial investigators to reconsider the possibility of disciplinary action — or even charges — against the officer who shot the Gitxsan First Nations man.

In 2008, Jackson failed to appear in court on five charges: Domestic assault, drug trafficking, uttering threats, obstructing a police officer and “a family court matter.” For more than a year, he moved frequently around B.C. to avoid arrest. However, there is little evidence police were vigorously pursuing him.

Then on Sept. 26, 2009, Mounties identified him near the northern B.C. community of New Hazelton. Fearing for the safety of his officers, the corporal in charge of the local detachment called in the RCMP’s regional Emergency Response Team (ERT).

Dressed in camo, wearing face paint and carrying M-16 assault rifles, ERT members rode in an unmarked Fisheries department truck to avoid detection and disembarked about a kilometre from the aboriginal hunting cabin where Jackson was hiding in the village of Kisega’as.

The team had little or no communication with the emergency response centre because they were too far into the bush for radios to work well. The team commander and deputy commander were both away that day, leaving a novice leader in charge, a fact that compounded the problem of being unable to communicate in real time with division brass.

The ERT also violated the Mounties’ own 2004 Public Safety Cooperation protocol that requires them to contact local native leaders in advance when they are called out on aboriginal land or when violence is expected (which, given the decision to send in the tactical unit, it clearly was).

Frankly, this transgression against policy doesn’t bother me much. If Mounties were afraid someone would tip Jackson to their approach, they would have been right to remain tight-lipped. Still, added to their other transgressions that day, the failure to follow procedure seems more likely the result of hubris than strategy.

There is a disagreement over whether officers first warned the armed Jackson to surrender before shooting him. Police insist at least two officers showed themselves and shouted, “Police. Put down your weapon.” Rodney’s brother Sonny complied.

Whether such an order was given likely wouldn’t have made any difference. One officer testifying at last week’s inquest said that immediately after officers called out to Jackson, eight shots were fired at him in rapid succession by a single Mountie. The time between the shouted order and eight rounds being fired was just three or four seconds. Even if police did demand Jackson drop his gun, they gave him little chance to do so.

More importantly, Jackson doesn’t seem to have posed an imminent threat to police or the public.

After the incident, most Mounties present reported they had witnessed Jackson turn with his shotgun held in a single hand (a position from which it is hard to shoot). One Mountie insisted Jackson had his gun in both hands and was levelling it to fire.

But none of the Mounties admitted at the time that Jackson was shot in the back. It took a crime-scene reconstruction specialist to determine that Rodney Shane Jackson was killed from behind. And a Fisheries officer on the scene testified that he saw a rake in Jackson’s hand, not a gun.

There are too many discrepancies in the officers’ retelling of events for their stories to be fully credible. This seems like another case in which officers acted rashly, then concocted a common story in an attempt to divert blame from a trigger-happy comrade.

And why did the ERT not call for a negotiator first before firing? Jackson was most likely armed and somewhat dangerous, but he had neither shot at police, nor attempted to flee before eight rounds from an assault rifle were fired at him. Mounties were executing an arrest warrant, not ending a hostage drama.

Police have a tough, dangerous job. Most of us would not trade places with them as they attempt to round up drug dealers, murderers, wife beaters and thugs. Still, there are no do-overs when a suspect is killed.

Because police are given a monopoly on the use of force, they must exercise extra caution to insure a suspect’s death is the absolute last resort.

Re: The Meaning Of Mayerthorpe, Lorne Gunter, March 30.
I am appalled that Lorne Gunter would choose to grind his personal axe on the reputations of four young RCMP officers who died so tragically at the Roszko farm on March 3, 2005, in Mayerthorpe, Alta. Whatever faults he may wish to find with the RCMP, whatever ills he may feel the organization suffers, his willingness to besmirch the memory of those four officers is unseemly, and it is simply not borne out by the facts.
The inquiry report clearly concludes that there was no fault in the training, experience or abilities of the officers involved. The report is clear that it was reasonable for the RCMP to conclude that Mr. Roszko had fled the property — there is no finding of fault there either.
Mr. Gunter chooses to ignore the findings of the inquiry, preferring to armchair quarterback the events. Why, he asks, did the RCMP do this, or fail to do that, on that tragic day? It is clear Mr. Gunter is guided by his personal belief that the RCMP is a failing organization, and that their conduct on that day is proof of this.
The RCMP is already a different organization than the one he describes in his column. Positive reform is ongoing, and great progress has already been made.
I believe that the inquiry report accurately reflects the results of a thorough and unbiased investigation into the events of that day. It is not for Mr. Gunter to second-guess the outcome and, in so doing, to question the decisions of the officers involved. That day was a dark one in our province and country, and we need to move on. We would like to do so with accurate understandings of what happened, and accurate memories of the honourable service of Constables Peter Schiemann, Leo Johnston, Brock Myrol and Anthony Gordon. Frank Oberle, Alberta’s Solicitor General, Minister of Public Security, Edmonton.

Cricket today — peace tomorrow?

Re: Cricket: War No Match For Cricket; Cricket Night In Canada, Iman Sheikh, both March 31.
I was pleasantly surprised to see two articles on cricket; it is good to see the Western world finally making an attempt to understand the sport and its immense popularity in other parts of the globe.
Wednesday’s match between India and Pakistan was a good one, with all the buzz around it helping, too. However, it will take more than just cricket to resolve the differences between the two countries. Let’s hope that India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Pakistan’s Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani used this opportunity to come up with something concrete. Kalyani Mahesh, Mississauga, Ont.

The comments of Pakistani fan Salma Riyaz — “The feeling is as if the bigger brother has won” — in the wake of his country’s loss to India in cricket, are really golden words. International politicians should heed this wisdom and solve political conflicts with loving words, not weapons. Tara Deshparde, London, Ont.

Though an interesting article on Asian cricket, Iman Sheikh needs to get up-to-date on Canada’s cricket history. The earliest reports of cricket in Canada date from 1785, with games in Montreal.
Cricket was the most popular sport in Canada until the early 20th century, when it was overtaken by ice hockey. It was so popular that it was declared the national sport by John A. Macdonald.
The first reference to cricket being played on an organized basis is in 1834 when a club was founded in Toronto and there are reports of matches being played in Hamilton and Guelph.
In 1840, there was a game between the Toronto and New York clubs. This has been called the first-ever international cricket match. And it is still played today at The Toronto Cricket and Curling club or the Philadelphia Cricket club. Peter Stevens, Toronto.

Readers not fooled by warming story

Re: Loss Of P.E.I. Small Price To Pay For Warming Boons, Terence Corcoran, April 1.
As per Terence Corcoran’s column on Canada’s future as a “hot green economy,” I’m still trying to picture 3.3 million people in Tuktoyaktuk all playing beach volleyball. Subsidies for hockey arenas will be redirected to dealing with mountains of goose poop as the birds stay home year round.
Looking forward to the five-year assessment on (no surprise) April Fool’s Day 2016. Lynn Tomkins, Toronto.

As a West Coast resident, I’m flabbergasted this report overlooked the major impacts here by 2100.
While Prince Edward Island has vanished beneath the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Vancouver International Airport has been reduced to a seaplane terminal from docks off the control tower. Fortunately, the elevated Canada Line rapid transit still conveniently connects the seaplane island to downtown Vancouver (thanks to the Conservative infrastructure “investment” in 2009).
The graphics in the National Post are, well, award-winning — now they’re also comedic. Derek Wilson, Port Moody, B.C.

Put our role in Libya to a vote

Re: Three Reasons Not To Fight, March 22.
I don’t think most Canadians want our government to be at war in Libya. I’ll bet if any party had the guts to say they’d get us out of this war, they would capture a lot of votes. Karen Selick, Belleville, Ont.

Let’s build more prisons

Re: Dale’s — And Clifford Olson’s — View On Prison Is Worthless, letters to the editor, March 30.
These three letters were penned by people who think we live in a perfect world. We do not. No matter what we may want, there will always be criminals. These letter writers did not consider the reality that violent offenders cannot re-offend if they are incarcerated. Violence is a threshold crime; once you become comfortable with a certain level of violence, it becomes easier to use more violence.
Until we are able to find a way of stopping people from using violence to get what they want, we have no choice to lock them up to protect the public. Walter Celej, Mississauga, Ont.

Short-order statecraft

It’s uncanny how the names of popular fast food establishments can so accurately reflect a country’s distinguishing political climate. Here in Canada, dropping the apostrophe from the iconic “Tim Hortons” brand reflects the unfettered extent of Quebec’s notorious language laws. In the U.K., “Wimpy” was the Cameron coalition’s adjudged response to the recent “anarchist” rioting, while in the United States, the preferred “In-and-Out” burger acknowledges the Libyan no-fly policy as a limited drive-through exercise.
I wonder what other political insights can be gained from our friendly neighbourhood take-outs? Advocates of costly and unnecessary elections falling like “Dominos,” perhaps? Mark S. Rash, Winnipeg.

REUTERS/Chris Wattie<strong>The third in an ongoing series of profiles of the major mayoral candidates. This week: George Smitherman</strong>
[caption id="attachment_27776" align="alignright" width="300" caption="Richard Johnson/National Post"]<a href="http://nationalpostcom.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/smitherman.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-27776" title="Smitherman" src="http://nationalpostcom.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/smitherman.jpg?w=300&quot; alt="" width="300" height="433" /></a>[/caption]
George Smitherman thinks the most brilliant line of his political career came in 1999, during his first campaign. It was at an all-candidates meeting in a Church Street community centre, after a competitor had gushed about snagging the NDP nomination. Mr. Smitherman grabbed the mic to share his own proud moment: earning the Tonya Harding Award in the gay hockey league.
“When I get to Queen’s Park, I’m not going to be Miss Congeniality there either!” he yelled.
After more than a decade spent cultivating that bruiser persona, having tumbled from the top of the polls, the 46-year-old has settled upon a middle-of-the-road mayoral candidacy that talks about cutting back — the civil service and taxes — while spending on areas such as transit and the arts.
Cementing the “anybody but” vote, Mr. Smitherman appears to have momentum for the first time in this campaign. He spent the last four days criss-crossing the city in a 28-foot camper that stopped in all 44 wards. <!--more-->
Wednesday was likely typical; he never missed a beat, glancing through speeches minutes before providing a polished delivery, banging out messages on his BlackBerry, fielding calls from the likes of Belinda Stronach, and getting his mom on the phone (on his second try). He seems to have a photographic memory of every whistle-stop he’s ever made in this city; “I’m just letting you know I’ve been around.” More than once he tried to tell the driver, a taxi fleet manager, which route he should be taking. It was, in short, a day in the life of a consummate politician.
<strong>7:39</strong> George Smitherman never looks more tired than at the start of his 16-hour day of handshakes and speeches. He ambles up the retractable steps of a camper called “Conquest,” Earl Grey tea from Tim Hortons in hand, and casts a sleepy face at its contents and his comrades. “I should sleep in this thing tonight.” Then he sinks into the plush faux leather three seater and buckles up.
<strong>7:58 </strong> The cool, damp air wakes up the politician. So, too, does the foot traffic. He is outside McDonald’s at St. Clair subway station, competing with <em>Metro</em> and <em>24</em> hawkers for takers of his glossy brochure, which outlines what he wants to do as mayor of Toronto. The converted are awaiting: former rival Sarah Thomson, now one of his most visible backers, and George Tory, son of former progressive conservative leader John Tory.
<strong>9:04</strong> At Yonge and Eglinton, Mr. Smitherman is confronted by a man who isn’t a fan of the guy he thinks wants to chuck Transit City. “That’s Joe Pantalone’s rhetoric,” Mr. Smitherman explains. He offers the man his brochure, tells him to see for himself that he wants to “build” on the light rail network that is a cornerstone of Mayor David Miller’s legacy. Richard Narvey, 42 and the owner of an Internet marketing company, says Mr. Smitherman has his vote. “I don’t like what I’ve been hearing from Rob Ford. I think [Smitherman’s] more level headed.”
<strong>9:39</strong> “I’m glad the provincial government shortened the campaign by two weeks, otherwise I would have put on another four friggin’ pounds,” says Mr. Smitherman as he bites into a chocolate chip muffin. Mr. Smitherman has a reputation for a sailor’s tongue and a drill sergeant’s temperament, but today, with a reporter within earshot, the profanities are kept to a minimum. The word “falming” does come up a lot, though, always in jest and inspired by stinging comments Sarah Thomson wrote about him online last year, before the two had met (not to be confused with flaming, falming refers to an uber flamboyant homosexual). “I’m a man with a plan,” he shrugs about his reputation. “I’m usually so tired, I’m compliant.”
<strong>11:17</strong> Mr. Smitherman doesn’t know it yet, but the folks at Nova Era Bakery have baked him a cake. A purple cake, of course, to match his ties. Joe Dias owns this establishment and eight others like it. His biggest beef, he tells Mr. Smitherman as they chat next to a shelf of baguettes and dinner rolls, is parking. The St. Clair Right-of-Way has been a disaster for business, he reports. “Are there some practical solutions to make it better?” asks Mr. Smitherman. He suggests more parking lots. Mr. Dias has been around long enough to be skeptical. “Promises are promises. Most of the time, they’re not kept.”
<strong>1:03</strong> Mr. Smitherman is calling for an audible. That’s football speak for a change of play on the field. In this case, he is instructing his handlers to find him a driveway with two cars parked on it, and the time to videotape him bemoaning the harmonized zoning bylaw that restricts the number of cars on driveways. These kind of opportunities are too good to pass up for a guy who claims to represent “change”, although not as much as Rob Ford. “It’s about stupid government and he’s a part of it,” says Mr. Smitherman. “We can’t make this sh-- up!”
<strong>1:45</strong> In the thick of a debate held in front of a largely Chinese crowd in a Scarborough gymnasium, Mr. Smitherman is justifying his plan to cut city revenues with a property tax freeze, plus also make it free for seniors to ride the TTC from 10 to 2. “It’s all free money!” Rocco Rossi quips. “They’re attacking me because they know that I’m the one to stop Rob Ford, and this is the issue in this election,” Mr. Smitherman bellows. Mr. Rossi rises: “I criticize his platform because I also want to stop George Smitherman!” Later, in the camper, Mr. Smitherman runs through Mr. Rossi’s numbers, questioning the feasibility of wiping out the city’s $3-billion debt by selling off assests. “It’s not as easy to realize as you would think,” he says. (Mr. Smitherman believes Toronto’s debt load is reasonable for a city this size. It is costing the city about $430-million a year to service it.) But Mr. Rossi “is not my fight. They have to run through me to get to Ford. I’m already head-to-head with that guy.”
<strong>3:54</strong> There’s a 20-minute window before his next event with a room full of accomplished women at the St. Lawrence Centre for the Performing Arts, and a rare opportunity to duck home. Mr. Smitherman returns with Michael, his adopted son, in his arms. The 22-month-old is wearing a jean jacket, matching pants and red slippers bearing monkey heads. They were both born in what is now Humber River Regional Hospital. Christopher Peloso, Mr. Smitherman’s husband who is on leave from managing retail operations for chocolate company Lindt Canada, is close behind, holding a gay magazine that has on its cover a cardboard-looking Mr. Smitherman carving a turkey. Michael picked it out of the newsstand, shrieking "daddy, daddy." Mr. Peloso found the association hilarious. “He can’t even make toast.”
<strong>7:44</strong> Hugh Innes, 57 years old and a longtime Leaside resident, is occupying a seat in the back row as the candidates arrive for the Leaside Property Owners Association debate. He thinks this is the most important election since David Crombie rose to power. “This city has been run into the ground,” says Mr. Innes, an investment funds manager, and a Rob Ford supporter. He considers Mr. Smitherman to be a “Johnny come lately.” Much of the crowd, however, responds favourably to Mr. Smitherman, even if he is dogged for his role in the eHealth scandal.
<strong>10:04</strong> Back on the Smithervan, the candidate is just about spent. “Today was a good day,” he says. Onwards to the <em>Spacing</em> Magazine party and schmoozing with downtowners. The odometer reads 109 miles.<em> </em>
<p style="text-align:center;"><em>National Post</em>
<em>nalcoba@nationalpost.com</em></p>

By the most charitable account, William Elliott, the first civilian to serve as RCMP commissioner, was a reformer with good intentions who ran aground on the hidebound culture of our national police force. His critics, on the other hand, say his management style was overbearing and abusive. There is probably some truth on both sides. In any event, his recently announced departure is welcome — since it has long been clear that he will not be the man to lead the RCMP out of its current crisis. His departure gives the federal Tories, who appointed Mr. Elliott in 2007, a chance for a do-over.

The next RCMP leader should be someone who currently sits within the Mounties’ command structure. Another outsider would have to win the forces’ respect first, before commencing needed reforms. As Mr. Elliott’s example shows, that can be a long and difficult process. The RCMP hasn’t the luxury of taking that kind of time. Too many problems demand immediate attention.

That said, a candidate looking to preserve the status quo would be equally unacceptable. An insider with patient, reformist instincts would be ideal.

The Mounties need to restore public confidence after a string of damaging incidents — from the death of Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver International Airpott to the Mayerthorpe massacre of four officers to allegations of managerial incompetence. For this, they need an independent civilian oversight board — similar to the one the supervises the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. So the next commissioner must be a modern, sophisticated police officer who can balance the political demands of the job while also supporting rank-and-file officers who perform dangerous police work across the country every day.